This chapter is about the global epistemological politics of religion illustrated through a study of the transnational history of Pakistan and Israel. It argues that the entangled nature of these state-building ventures contributed to the circulation of particular understandings of ‘religion’ and its relation to the state, that this structured the minority politics of the British Indian Muslims and the Palestinian Jews, and that it both limited and enabled the claims to the nations and states that came to replace them. The case study focuses on two key individuals in the history of the Indian and Palestine partition and the Pakistani and Israeli independence that followed: Reginald Coupland and Muhammad Zafarullah Khan. It asks how they, the institutions they represented, and the ideas they carried, circulated, and influenced changed over the final decade before independence. It shows how claims for the recognition of religion in international relations are not separate from these forms of colonial epistemological politics but are intimately connected to them.

The afterword offers a coda to the volume, without addressing individual essays’ achievements individually. Rather, it reflects on how the essays reconceive the problem of Cold War liberalism as a category less in Atlantic intellectual history or political theory than in the history of the foreign relations of the American hegemon after World War II. The contemporary renaissance of Cold War liberalism suggests that pondering how it arose and dominated in the first place will continue to teach useful lessons about its senescent phase, which is unlikely to end soon. Someday geopolitical transformations will bring into being a different enough world than the Cold War liberal one that emerged in the middle of the twentieth century. Until then, the meanings and outcomes of Cold War liberalism will demand investigation, and this volume will play a pivotal role in an ongoing referendum on how contemporary politics came about, and on what should happen next.

This introduction presents the main arguments of the book, develops a novel terminological framework, and situates the book in current research. First, from the perspective of international economic and social human rights, this is not an age of human rights triumphalism. The main human rights advocates featured in this book were concerned with international justice and redistributive justice, and theirs was a long quest to lift international economic and social human rights onto a level-playing field through three phases: internationalizing rights, criticizing global inequalities through rights, and attempting to secure the legitimacy of these rights once and for all. Second, on a broader egalitarian plateau, human rights advocacy can be situated on a redistributionist terrain. Third, this book supplements institutional, organizational, diplomatic, political, and movement-centered research on international human rights. There is a gap in existing scholarship in understanding historical interrelations between human rights and inequalities, which is where this book intervenes, above all from an intellectual historical perspective.

This chapter locates the emergence of the Greco-Roman city state within a process that saw the expansion of sedentary peasant populations across the Afro-Eurasian world. This was a process accompanied by a wider range of epidemic diseases, the spread of militaristic ‘warring’ states and intensification of slavery. Too often, the rise of the Greeco-Roman city-state has been studies in isolation. This chapter presents the city-state and its ability to mobilize the peasantry for war as one response to the dynamics and constraints of sedentary peasant society and urbanization that increasingly manifested as the dominant form of social organization in a band stretching from East to West across the Afro-Eurasian world from the beginnings of the Iron Age. The chapter starts with demographic growth and the ecological constraints of peasant agriculture, including discussion of Ester Boserup, James C. Scott and the recent work of Graeber & Wengrow. It then moves on to state formation, war-making and military mobilization before analyzing ancient slavery within a continuum of varieties from the early-modern Caribbean to the Islamic world.

At the end of the book, the conclusion revisits the current debate among world historians whether to favour comparative approaches or search for cultural connections. Based on the themes analyzed in the current volume, this chapter argues in conclusion that ancient world history will have to combine both. Macro- and micro-perspectives should be seen as complementary; the former makes it possible to identify broader patterns while the latter enables the study of cultural exchanges. The latter, however, has often been preoccupied with marginal phenomena while the former sometimes has been too teleological, subsuming everything to a developmental logic ending in Europe. The view of ancient world history developed here seeks to identify a set of global patterns that combine both the population majority and the most central social, political and cultural developments of the period into a unified whole while exploring how these phenomena interacted across ancient Afro-Eurasia. Roman historians can gain a lot from intensifying the dialogue with students of other premodern Afro-Eurasian societies.

This chapter introduces the growing field of world history and its intellectual predecessors to make the argument why Greco-Roman society needs to find its place within this fast evolving discourse. Recontextualizing the classical experience within a wider world history will allow Greco-Roman history to be aligned more closely with the global norm, rather than remain an anomaly in European history. But ancient history does not simply have to be at the receiving end of the putative dialogue. The field has a long prior record of engaging in a creative dialogue both with anthropology and historical sociology. The former favoured the study of culture; the latter promoted societal comparison. Currently, world history is torn between a focus on cultural connection and on historical comparison. Building on the past experience of classics, this chapter will equally show how a glance at Greco-Roman society may help the field of world history both to overcome this division. An Afro-Eurasian arena is identified as the context for parallel and interconnected developments of peasantries and slavery, universal empires, literary cultures, world trade in charismatic goods and rebellions.

The introduction explains the book’s innovative contribution to the historiographies of human rights and German history. Whereas human rights scholarship largely sees post-1970s rights advocacy as a form of conservative humanitarianism, the book demonstrates that the triumph of market-friendly human rights in Cold War Germany was the product of contingency. Bitter political fights within the left, conservative left baiting, and the decline of revolutionary projects in the Global South enabled the market-friendly vision promoted by Christian Democrats to sideline the market-critical human rights vision of the left. The introduction also demonstrates that any account seeking to understand the development of the German left after 1968 must pay close attention to its internationalism.

In 1911, Italians living abroad constituted one-sixth of Italy’s population, numbering roughly five million people. However, the experiences of emigrant communities have not been incorporated into the narrative of Italy’s war. This chapter discusses the place of migration within the historiography of the First World War and of the war within migration history. It introduces the cohort of 300,000 emigrant soldiers who returned to Italy to complete their conscripted military service during the war, a mass mobilisation which was a uniquely Italian phenomenon. Scholars are divided as to whether this should be regarded as a success or a failure: I argue it is remarkable that so many made the journey considering that, in most locations, there were no coercive measures obliging them to do so. The chapter lays out the global micro-history approach adopted in the book and the decision to focus on four emigrant soldiers, each typical and atypical in different respects: Americo Orlando in São Paulo, Esterino Alessandro Tarasca in New York, Cesare Bianchi in London and Lazzaro Ponticelli in Paris.

This chapter argues that recent global histories of Europe represent one specific mode of global awareness in a long history of European global historical and social scientific consciousness. European history after our most recent “global turn” must take into account previous modes of global consciousness and examine how globalization has been shaped by this knowledge. Past understanding of global interconnectedness did not necessarily lead to more open borders, increased interdependency, or growing cultural fluidity. Dis-integrating and downscaling modes of social organization were invented and reinvigorated in response to perceived global forces. There were also conscious attempts to channel the fruits and accumulations of global processes based on an awareness of their potentially enriching and destabilizing impact. These efforts to take control of globalization did not stop it, but they did give it a specific shape in particular moments. This chapter argues that the half-century following the French Revolution witnessed what might be called a deglobalizing globalization: a moment when the global integration that many considered responsible for the upheaval of the Revolution did not stop but was redirected in the service of a sovereign nation through the birth of new modes of social science and history writing.

Why did European history come so late to the global turn? Europe’s past had of course always been constructed relative to its Islamic or Mongol peripheries, and later its colonial offshore. But only recently has it been understood that European and extra-European history are in a dynamic relationship of reciprocal influence. Intellectual and economic history recognized this before social history, which in its post-1960 flowering took it for granted that European social forms were both more advanced and categorically different from others. During the 1970s and 1980s, however, a generation after political decolonization, new work began to explore the impact of peripheries on the European core and to measure Europe from the outside. After 2000, a globalized European social history became visible. Its evasion of the constraints of the national paradigm has opened up striking new pan- and trans-European historical projects and methods. These are provoking new questions of how we might reconfigure European history in ways which understand eastern and central Europe in their own terms, rather than simply as the retarded extensions of “advanced” western European phenomena.